I don't like it... the classic look just reminds of Windows '98 and all the problems I had with that. I'm glad to be done with it. I'll take XP, Vista, or Windows 7 any day over the W'98 look. ugggg.
Thanks Bryce.Classic Theme is just hot, who can't not like it?
I did figure out how to get the classic theme back though. If you right click on the desktop and click personalize and go to themes. It's under the high contrast themes. It's not exactly like the original classic theme, but good enough.
Ok Bryce i just want you to explain something. If windows 98 was the best os ever then how could xp improve upon it. That would make XP the best OS ever since it improved on 98. I dont really care though just thought i would point that out. Also most computer geeks i know which is literally hundreds at caterpillar prefer the new style compared to the old one. But as stated earlier prefernce is a personal opinion and i respect that. That is why i have been trying to work with reghckr to make the classic start menu available to the all in windows 7. Hopefully we successfully complete it.Sorry, but Win98 was the best Windows there is, seriously. It was a good solid stable OS, which XP barely improved on. I'd take '98 over XP anyday.
Hi guys.
For the title, if you visit the Technet forums, you will see that it looks very much as though MS will reintoduce the Classic as an option.
Because people don't like change and having to relearn something that were used to using without thinking about it. Unfortunately once you change the UI you move for a time into what's known as conscious competence. this means you know how to do something but have to thing a little harder about acomplishing it. Once you get used to the new UI you them move onto unconscious competence. (where you can do something without thinking about it)Why do you think the Classic Menu for Office 2007 is so overwhelmingly popular?
I don't see any reason why downloading it. In Vista it was there. Default in Vista was the new start menu. That's OK. Many of new user, who haven't used a PC before, like the new start menu. But in Vista you could switch to the classic start menu. Why do not the same thing in Windows 7?Now I don't see a reason why it can't be a downloadable "add-on"
I don't see any reason why downloading it. In Vista it was there. Default in Vista was the new start menu. That's OK. Many of new user, who haven't used a PC before, like the new start menu. But in Vista you could switch to the classic start menu. Why do not the same thing in Windows 7?
In Windows so many parts are configurable: Colours, Themes, list and detail view in Windows Explorer, show hidden and system files or not, and so on. Why not also the start menu style?
The conclusion i came to with my benchmarking results showed that when on a lower end computer classic mode was faster while on high end machines the new start menu is faster. So it is all based on the hardware someone is running. So yes in some cases the classic is faster and in other cases the new start menu is faster. Benchmarks really cannot be used to compare the two start menus though. It also depends on the person. Personally i take 3/4 the time of completing my tasks by switching to the new start menu. Other people are faster with the classic start menu. People just think that everything is based on benchmarking and they are wrong. almost 99% of the comparison should be based on the user not what a damn program says is faster.Another case in point, many have posted that classic is slower than the new interface, I would like to see some evidence on this, I have personally ran benchmark tests with Darper, MITRE and AFRL and have seen that in fact Classic mode is a faster interface in performance and speed. So where is everyone's evidence or test results proving that classic mode is slower???
People just think that everything is based on benchmarking and they are wrong. almost 99% of the comparison should be based on the user not what a damn program says is faster.